On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 10:05 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>> Yes I'm reluctant about the whole thing, doesn't say from the patch it
>> was indeed intended as a discussion item...
>
>You should have marked it as "RFC" in the subject, then.
I forgot, mea culpa.
>> I didn't think so, but nowadays it'
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 16:05, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Linus Walleij wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> > [Me]
>> >> So yes, I can positively repeat this on a clean tree. It's still
>> >> -pendantic that
>> >> is the culprit, if I copy the above and run manually wit
Dear Linus Walleij,
In message
you wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > [Me]
> >> So yes, I can positively repeat this on a clean tree. It's still
> >> -pendantic that
> >> is the culprit, if I copy the above and run manually without -pedantic
> >> it compiles fi
Dear Linus Walleij,
In message
you wrote:
>
> Yes I'm reluctant about the whole thing, doesn't say from the patch it
> was indeed intended as a discussion item...
You should have marked it as "RFC" in the subject, then.
> Then this happens on my side:
>
> make -C tools all
> make[1]: Entering
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 14:59, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> [Me]
>>> So yes, I can positively repeat this on a clean tree. It's still -pendantic
>>> that
>>> is the culprit, if I copy the above and run manually without -pedantic
>>> it compiles f
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> [Me]
>> So yes, I can positively repeat this on a clean tree. It's still -pendantic
>> that
>> is the culprit, if I copy the above and run manually without -pedantic
>> it compiles fine.
>
> are you using ccache ?
Yes :-P
I didn't think s
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 14:48, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 11:24, Linus Walleij wrote:
>>> I do this, first I apply the patches I sent for Integrator support, then
>>> I apply this patch to test with network support:
>>
>>
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 11:24, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> I do this, first I apply the patches I sent for Integrator support, then
>> I apply this patch to test with network support:
>
> no changes at all should be necessary to include/configs/
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 11:24, Linus Walleij wrote:
> I do this, first I apply the patches I sent for Integrator support, then
> I apply this patch to test with network support:
no changes at all should be necessary to include/configs/. build the
tools in an unconfigured tree to avoid any of that
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Linus Walleij,
>
> In message <1310469889-12999-1-git-send-email-linus.wall...@linaro.org> you
> wrote:
>> On this GCC in Fedora (4.6.0 20110530) the tools gen_eth_addr
>> and img2srec become size zero if compiled with -pedantic (no
>>
Dear Linus Walleij,
In message <1310469889-12999-1-git-send-email-linus.wall...@linaro.org> you
wrote:
> On this GCC in Fedora (4.6.0 20110530) the tools gen_eth_addr
> and img2srec become size zero if compiled with -pedantic (no
> warnings are emitted however). Marking them _NOPED solves the
> i
On this GCC in Fedora (4.6.0 20110530) the tools gen_eth_addr
and img2srec become size zero if compiled with -pedantic (no
warnings are emitted however). Marking them _NOPED solves the
issue for me.
Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij
---
tools/Makefile |6 +++---
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+),
12 matches
Mail list logo
